Preview

Rousseau as Totalitarian?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
525 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Rousseau as Totalitarian?
ROUSSEAU AS TOTALITARIAN? Rousseau, known as “Father of Modern Democratic Theory”, was being accused by other people as a “Father of Totalitarianism”. This is one of the contentious issues which attack Rousseau’s social contract; he is seen to be advocating totalitarian solution rather democratic. Others may have only misunderstood the concept of totalitarianism but I tell you there is no clear evidence showing he is in favor of totalitarian. Why, then, some considered Rousseau as a totalitarian? Maybe it goes with his controversial concept of general will. The general will can be perceived as an objective truth to which every citizen must conform. Therefore everybody was under the control of the general will. Since totalitarianism is defined as a political system where the state holds total authority over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life whenever necessary; this means that the general will can be use as a totalitarian device. But the methods suggested for discovering the general will were basically democratic. This concept was introduced to prevent exploitation and this will only take effect if it is willed by the citizens. In this case, we can see that Rousseau was proposing that the best way for a community to make decisions was really to use democratic procedures. Hence, we cannot condemn him being a totalitarian advocate just because general will reigns. After all, even if it controls every citizen, it still comes from all and it tends always to the preservation and welfare of the whole and every associate.
Another thing that can probably make people thinks of Rousseau’s social contract as a totalitarian is due to his view of “majority binds the rest”. Rousseau was aware that no particular human being knows what the general will truly is that is why he proposes that what the majority has voted, it is the general will, assuming that everybody is thinking for the common good of the community and not for his own

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    2 ATP are invested during the first part of glycolysis for each molecule of glucose broken down…

    • 457 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In his 1755 discourse on 'The Origins of Inequality', Jean-Jacques Rousseau argues his conception of the natural state of mankind, and its subsequent corruption throughout the progress towards civil society. Whilst Rousseau's idealism can be targeted as unrealistic, and his criticisms of the state potentially destabilising to certain societies, ultimately he makes a valid philosophical argument against tyranny which helps found republican political values.…

    • 252 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau’s makes it clear that “the only will dominating government should be the general will or the law.” The National Assembly of France used this principle in the sixth listed right in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen which reads that “the law is an expression of the general will.” The general will, as Rousseau states, is for the best of the common interest of the country. The king will not always act in the best interest of his country, so it is imperative to form a constitutional monarchy that seeks to act in the best interest of the general…

    • 1264 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    According to Rousseau, the civil society is what represses people’s freedom who argues that people’s freedoms are better secured in the state of nature. This point of view sharply contrasts with that of Hobbes who sees the state of nature as one of constant battles. Hobbes sees a civil society as the most ideal way of ensuring that collective freedoms are preserved.…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Locke and Rousseau both believed in a form of direct democracy, including freedom, equality, and independence. One of Locke’s important philosophies was that people are born with a blank slate, the “Tabula Rasa”, so everyone deserves political respect from birth, but with bad actions such privileges can go away. Rousseau pushed for a social contract to govern society, which took away rights but promised safety. Also, they both valued the human mind much more than past rulers, hence why they set up many ways for citizens to express their own ideas in their government. By including their philosophies in the Enlightenment age it helped push more countries in Europe to become a direct…

    • 496 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Whereas Madison asserts that the State has no say over a person’s relationship with the Creator, Rousseau only rejects certain State religions on technical grounds and eventually concludes that society should demand a significant religious test. It is surprising that given Madison and Rousseau’s uniform goal, a stable society, they should come up with such widely varying methods for achieving it. One may be tempted to suggest that, unlike Rousseau, Madison considers individual rights to be more important than the proper functioning of society. Upon closer examination, however, it becomes clear that Madison and Rousseau's general disagreement on State power stems from a more fundamental dispute over how society works. According to Madison, society exists with a certain power and then instills this power in the government, while Rousseau argues that it is the creation of a government which makes society materialize. These disparate views on the directionality of government and society directly lead to Madison and Rousseau’s other…

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau added to the idea of democracy by creating the idea that people are born good but can be corrupted by society, therefore they need to make the laws themselves and willingly obey them. He believed that if left to itself, society would follow these equally created laws and society would maintain its naturally born goodness. He believes that only the general society is capable enough to run themselves with laws created by the people for the people. Much of these ideas are still around today combined with other ideas in our own…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the article that I read Philosopher Thomas Hobbes believed that people must surrender their freedom to a ruler. In the article, french philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau states that people should come together in societies and the solution was to form a social contract with general will or the common good.…

    • 414 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    He also thinks citizens should have the right to revolt and government should always give and protect our rights. However, the Enlightenment thinker Jean-Jacques Rousseau, feels we protect our own rights by working together. In class we discussed how his belief is similar to the phrase: If we all have superpowers the no one has superpowers. We considered this phrase because if everyone were to have superpowers, then we wouldn't wish to have them anymore since everyone has them. Rousseau also stated we must use reason to give the individual rights of life, liberty, and property. Locke shows his views on liberty by inferring one should have the ability to choose who governs them, as well as having their freedom of religion protected. Rousseau expresses his conception toward liberty by explaining whatever the majority of the people want should become law and rules should be strictly enforced if the people are in…

    • 489 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    According to Rousseau, there are some good things in civilization but there are negatives that come with it. This correlates to his famed quote “A man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains”. This can be interpreted as people are born free, but they are chained by the societies that they live in. People believe they live above society’s standards but it is society themselves who reminds people that you always seek approval from them and always conform to their beliefs, therefore it makes us a slave to societies standards. Even the people who enforce society’s standards and think they are the perfect example for society also show that they are a bigger slave than to those who are trying to seek the approval of society. Rousseau's main argument is that the main cause for all of human nature's problem is not 'sin' but separation from 'Nature.' He believed that Nature has always been kind to man and only when he separates himself from Nature that he degenerates both physically and morally. This is in direct contrast to Hobbes' views that man is fundamentally…

    • 1774 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    As a prerequisite for our Environmental Justice class, our group was responsible for putting together a Word Cloud presentation based on the readings we have covered in class. I was assigned the Laura Pulido essay, “Geographies of Race and Ethnicity 1: White Supremacy VS. White Privilege in Environmental Racism Research”. Guided by the Critical Thinking Method, I was able to clearly understand the reading. The critical thinking method was a helpful source to me not only because it helped me understand clearly, but because it helped me to identified Pulido’s concerns. I was able to identified Pulido’s target, also I was able to identify the why behind of her concerns, as well as what mattered most to Pulido and I. What matter most to me as a…

    • 150 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Rousseau argues that sovereignty should be in the hands of the people, he also makes a distinction between sovereign and government. The government in charged of implementing and enforcing the general will. The government consists of a small group of citizens, known as magistrates. Rousseau opposed to the idea that the people should exercise sovereignty by a representative assembly. Rousseau supported the idea that they should create the laws directly.…

    • 70 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    What is totalitarianism? Totalitarianism is a form of government in which the government completely reminisced one’s individuality and freedom. In Aldous Huxley’s novel, “Brave New World,” totalitarianism is perfectly demonstrated in which humans are scientifically made and have no control over their desired purpose on earth. Totalitarianism is also seen in George Orwell’s novel, “1984,” where the government has eyes on everything. This means there is no privacy what so ever. The uncontrolled power of the state will destroy a community and lead to total disaster.…

    • 405 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Each man is represented by equal votes in a legislature as for majority rule but every vote and not the opinion with the greatest voters is taken into account. Thus the legislative cannot indicate privileged citizens and each citizen must abide by the same law. Majority rule is against this very foundation of Rousseau's theory and only happens in the worst case scenario. Individual would disconnect themselves from the will of all and act as factions. QUOTE. The general will is not applicable to an actual society as it is and without compromises but nevertheless it seems that if the general will was applied in a rational society, there would be an over-expression of the collective will. Through each round of vote a majority would emerge and would eventually lead to a domination in the said representative government which Rousseau tries to avoid. Not to mention that at the time being, Rousseau only considered countries with a limited size such as his cherished Geneva which leaves room for a lot of misinterpretation. It can be taken as an uncertainty or immaturity of his own theories as he does not seem eager to transpose his ideal of democracy to a lager state (though he later wrote drafts of…

    • 623 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Man never progresses because he lacks the ability to solve problems. By taking step aback, Rousseau is not assuming that humans were once solitary, whereas in Hobbes’ version, people did have social interaction, but only government was absent. However, in absence of reason, humans do have emotions like pity, which helps them live in harmony. With everything well balanced, savages are happy within themselves, making inequality hardly noticeable. Even though he thinks that the state of nature never existed and never will, Rousseau’s preference for the savage human over civilized human is fascinating because this implies that Rousseau does not want the humans to develop. However, when we look at the modern society, humans are oppressed at every moment in contrast to the state of nature. Today, as Lincoln said, democracy is defined as for the people, by the people and of the people. Is the power really in people’s hands? Or are they politically enslaved by the leaders they voted to represent them? As Rousseau says, laws are just made by the rich, here political leaders, to secure their power and position, keeping the weak, the citizens, in the illusion of…

    • 591 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics